HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30530 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manoj Gautam, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 35 of 2026, under Section 107 B.N.S., Police Station Nagina, District Bijnor during the pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 04.02.2026, whereas the first information report was lodged on 07.02.2026. Delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. Initially, the first information report was lodged under Section 108 B.N.S. During investigation, the case has been converted under Section 107 B.N.S. Further, as per the allegations in the first information report, the statement of the witnesses namely Anil and Sanjeev Kumar and the material collected during the course of investigation, the essential ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 107 B.N.S. are not made out. The applicant, in no manner, abetted the commission of suicide by the deceased. Mere allegations of a love relationship between the applicant and the deceased in absence of any positive act of instigation or intentional aid on the part of the applicant would not constitute the offence of abetment to suicide. Investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has been submitted. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant is in jail since 07.02.2026 and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manoj Kumar Gautam Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Surendra Kumar Alias Moola .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that the first information report has been lodged belatedly. As per the allegations in the first information report, the statement of the witnesses namely Anil and Sanjeev Kumar and the material collected during the course of investigation, the essential ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 107 B.N.S. are not made out. There is no direct act attributable to the applicant that could be construed as instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid to the commission of suicide. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for almost seven months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant- Surendra Kumar alias Moola, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and, (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. September 8, 2026 SKT/- BAIL No. 30530 of 2026 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad